PARMESHWAR LAL AND CO Vs. JAI NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of two appeals F. A. O. Nos. 2 and 3 of 1951 and two Civil Revisions Nos. 187 and 183 of 1951 all arising out of the same order. The appeals are directed against the same order passed in two suits dated the 18th December 1950 in which the learned trial Judge repeated his order for remitting the award and also dismissed the objections which had been filed by the defendants. As there was some doubt as to whether an appeal would lie from this order or not the defendants have filed two revisions also in this Court.

(2.) THE plaintiff had dealings with two firms, firm Subh Karan Das-Churanji Lal and Par-mesh war Lal & Company. THE former deals in forward contracts of gold and the latter of silver. THE partners in the former are Subh Karan Das, Madan Lal, Basheshar Lal, Chu-ranji Lal, Parmeshwar Lal and Ram Lal and in the latter are Basheshar Lal, Parmeshwar Lal, Gulzari Lal and Shiv Karan Das. Both these firms are firms of pucca arhtias. Jai Narain, the plaintiff, filed two suits against the firm Subh Karan Das-Churanji Lal for forward contracts of gold from 19th February 1946, to 19th July 1946, and against Parmeshwar Lal & Company for silver contracts, but it is not clear for what period. Both these suits were for accounts. A preliminary issue was framed as to whether a suit for accounts lay against Pucca Arhtias.

(3.) IT may here be stated that a revision was brought against this order of the 18th of March 1949, but I remanded the case for adjudication of the objections which had been raised. So the result of the order of the Subordinate Judge dated the 18th December 1950, is that the award was remitted to the arbitrator under Section 16(1) (a) and (b) of the Arbitration Act for determining the respective liabilities of the two defendant firms separately. Against this order, two appeals and two revisions have been brought.